Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

I reject the elitist associated with putting schooled, learned, sheet music based art music above naive art, simplicity, improvisation, pop or whatever. It reeks of snobbery and is an insult to anyone who has composed but not written, basically saying they're not genuinely composing.

I have a confession; I've been playing for about six years but I am so poor at reading sheet music that writing my own works up would be impractical, I feel so... small? When told I am not a "real" composer.

Of course, I get what you'll say (of course you wont say it now); I'm not a real composer, I'm still barely above beginner, I hardly have anything of value to say on the piano at this point - I call BS, I have a lot to say and I think it's beautiful.

I reject the elitist associated with putting schooled, learned, sheet music based art music above naive art, simplicity, improvisation, pop or whatever. It reeks of snobbery and is an insult to anyone who has composed but not written, basically saying they're not genuinely composing.

Egalitarianism is all very well, and of course no-one should be discouraged from starting composing until they acquire a full set of technical skills! But, really, there's no virtue in ignorance.

Quote:

I have a confession; I've been playing for about six years but I am so poor at reading sheet music that writing my own works up would be impractical, I feel so... small? When told I am not a "real" composer.

Well, are you? We're not just here to support your self-esteem you know!Pull your finger out and improve your reading then. You're missing out on such a lot, and condemning yourself to forever re-invent the wheel instead of "standing on the shoulders of giants"! A student who builds walls around what he is prepared to learn is merely a fool to himself.

Anyway, wasn't this about how a composition should best be presented for assessment and comment? If you don't notate, I can almost guarantee your work will either be no more than a simple tune (nothing wrong with that, but what can we say about it other than "that's a nice tune"?) or will be one of those rambling improvisations with which we're all too familiar, prompting "some nice ideas, now DO something with it!"

Can there be philosophy (not just feelings) without language? Literature (not just story-telling) without writing?

I reject the elitist associated with putting schooled, learned, sheet music based art music above naive art, simplicity, improvisation, pop or whatever. It reeks of snobbery and is an insult to anyone who has composed but not written, basically saying they're not genuinely composing.

I don't really think that this is much better than your last post. It still shows unmanagable anger, hatred and even troll idioms inside! So just quit it, will you? You're not making things better and all that you've shown is that you don't like someone elses ideas and opinions. Too bad for you, but so what?

Exalted: I'll start a new thread about your persistence to keep a close mind!

Foxes, I suggest that you don't allow yourself to get provoked by wording such as "real" Capital Title (anything), and explore what everyone in the group as a whole has to say.

I personally prefer to see a written score because I can't hear fast enough. When it's on paper I can follow and see how everything connects and where it's going. This isn't snobbery, it's a weakness.

For the rest, the only way to really tell is to have tried both of them. In the same way I can't make any pronouncements about jazz improvisation because I don't understand enough. I just have an enormous respect for them. Or - today I listened to an early performance of Ravi Shankar in honour of his passing and it had a lot to it, but I don't understand enough to say more. It's more a feeling that it's really really good.

It is unfortunate when value judgments come into the picture. Some of the people here are pros. Many of us are still learning and I don't know at what point we become "real".

I began to learn theory and be able to write down musical thoughts a few years ago. My impression is that when you can write it down and have more understanding, you can get more complex because it is written down and you have it in front of you. I don't know if more complex is necessarily better. But maybe somebody who can do good work improvising could do even better writing it down - or at least capture it on paper.

Why? "Value-judgement" isn't a dirty word. Don't people post their work here hoping for confirmation that it has value? Trouble is, some of them want us to lie :-)

This got a genuine laugh out loud!

The initial question was which we prefer, recording or scores when evaluating a new work posted here. As I stated before I believe a recording is closest to the audience experience. A piece of music should be able to stand on its own with little or no explanation. I understand that viewing a score helps see what's going on and follow the logic (or lack thereof) of the composer, but that has little to do with the experience of the music.

Then we have the discussion of through composed vs. improvised. I've done and do both, but for me improvisation is limited by my playing abilities and areas of comfort harmonically. It seems I only get creative when I make a mistake. So I prefer through composed, I feel I can make my music more dense in so many ways than I typically do when improvising.

Finally, we have Foxes outburst about writing music down and lack of sight reading ability. I also have difficulty sight reading, it's gotten better because I insist on writing my music down and then struggle to play it. There's nothing wrong with struggling to do something it means you're outside your comfort zone and that means your extending your capabilities. Eventually it makes you more knowledgeable and creative.

So what exactly were you upset about? Was it the implication that you're not a "REAL" composer? You placed that judgment on yourself by getting mad about it. My advice is learn what you need to learn in order to become the REAL composer you aspire to be. Who knows maybe you can actually make a living composing, just don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.

Why? "Value-judgement" isn't a dirty word. Don't people post their work here hoping for confirmation that it has value? Trouble is, some of them want us to lie :-)

Actually, if I were at a stage where I thought I had a composition ready to be posted, I would not be looking for confirmation of value per se. Does it move people or is it interesting, at one end of the spectrum. Does it have specific weaknesses that could be improved, which is the side that might interest me more. But the value judgment I was talking about is a broad statement using words like "real" (anyone) to modify people, because of what I've seen. In any forum where there are skills or professions, that is the kind of thing that tends to set some people off. I'm a moderator in a professional forum, and as soon as someone uses the word "real" (you're not a real professional - you don't have the credentials - your words must be discounted because of who you are and what papers you don't have) then tempers flare. I cringe at the word "real" used to modify people because of what it does.

First off, a gracious nod to Steve for re-emphasizing that music is SOUND, and that sound must stand on its own merits. What good is a beautifully rendered score if the resultant sound is terrible?

Now, onto a subject about which I know very little, but that has always fascinated me - cabinetmaking .(And here I will refrain from using KeyString’s most dreaded adjective, replacing it each occurance with a number sign (#))

A (#) Cabinetmaker is a highly skilled professional, with a vast knowledge of her/his craft. No one is “born” a Cabinetmaker. Everyone must learn the craft from “scratch”. The (#) Cabinetmaker has an array of tools that s/he maintains, and that are specific to the craft - probably professional grade tools. S/he is an expert in their use. Not quite so obvious is the (#) Cabinetmaker’s detailed knowledge of wood - its properties, its hardness, its graininess, its curing, its ability to be cut and shaped and worked. The Cabinetmaker knows where to acquire the best of these woods, about what they cost, approximately how much s/he might need for a particular project. Another not-quite-so-obvious characteristic of the (#) Cabinetmaker is her/his acquired knowledge of glues and hardware fasteners - which types to use on certain joints, and their longevity, and their cosmetic values. And even deeper here is an assumed understanding of physics, and counter-balancing forces, and the placement of fasteners for maximum strength, possibly in shear. The more of this knowledge our Cabinetmaker possesses, and can bring to her/his craft, the better the Cabinetmaker, and probably the better the Cabinet.

Finally, we turn to the obvious work of the Cabinetmaker = applying the tools and the fasteners to the woods. In this stage, the Cabinetmaker LOOKS, to the untrained eye, just like a Carpenter. In fact, (#) Carpenters have a complete skill set and body of knowledge all their own, but I shall refrain from going into that here.

Let’s jump for a minute to someone who is getting a Sears band saw for Christmas. For years, this individual has been sawing wood, with only occasional danger or injury to himself. He’s examined his aging kitchen cabinets – they do not look that complicated! - and is now ready to make the leap.

So, here is where Steve’s point comes into play = results. Will the results produced by the novice be satisfactory? Would the Carpenter do a better job? Where will the product of the Cabinetmaker fit into the mix? Answer for yourself.

I stand by my original assertion – a (#) Composer, like a Conductor, sees it all.

Ed

_________________________
In music, everything one does correctly helps everything else.